by Dan Moren

June 11, 2020 9:15 AM PT

Apple takes the wraps off WWDC 2020 schedule

Apple:

Now in its 31st year, WWDC20 will be the biggest WWDC to date, bringing together the global Apple developer community of more than 23 million in an unprecedented, virtual way, from June 22 to 26. Apple today shared the WWDC20 lineup, including keynote and Platforms State of the Union timing, and information on how developers can learn about the future of iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, and watchOS, and engage with Apple engineers.

There’s nothing too surprising in here: Apple will be streaming its keynote live from Apple Park on Monday June 22, at 1pm Eastern/10am Pacific.

Further events, such as the Platforms State of the Union and sessions will be available via the Apple Developer app on iOS and Apple Developer website. Sessions will be posted at 10am Pacific each day.

If there is a big surprise, it’s that the Apple Developer Forums are getting a revamp, with anybody able to search and view them and, perhaps most surprisingly, with responses from Apple engineers. However, only Apple Developer Program members will be allowed to post on the site.

Similarly, the labs—which were the big question going into WWDC—will be available only to Developer Program members, and will offer one-on-one opportunities to talk to Apple engineers, presumably via a video chat mechanism, though Apple hasn’t spelled that out explicitly. Space, however, is limited.

As Apple’s first virtual WWDC, it’ll be interesting to see how this shakes out, since this model may certainly be used in years forward. Expect some problems to crop up, for sure. But overall, it seems as though Apple is attempting to be proactive about addressing the biggest pain points in the switch to an online conference.

by Jason Snell

June 10, 2020 4:25 PM PT

What will the ARM Mac look like?

I really enjoyed this post by Gus Mueller about what’s likely to happen if Apple is indeed transitioning the Mac to ARM processors:

With all the recent rumors flying around about the Mac transitioning to ARM processors, I’ve seen some assertions about what this means for software going forward. I thought I could chime in on this as someone who’s been developing software for the Mac for a long time, including the last architecture transition from PowerPC to Intel.

I agree with all of Gus’s points. ARM Macs are going to be Macs, almost certainly running more or less all Mac software that currently runs on Catalina. ARM Macs won’t be iPads. They’ll be Macs.¹

Who knows where the Mac will go after it makes the ARM transition? Between SwiftUI and Mac Catalyst, it’s entirely possible that Apple will lead developers on a years-long path to an entirely new method of delivering Mac apps. But there’s no point in the Mac existing if it’s just an iPad—and I think Apple agrees.

by Dan Moren

June 10, 2020 12:59 PM PT

Explaining the law that prevents Internet platforms from being sued

Fantastic explainer by Ars Technica’s Timothy B. Lee about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which grants immunity to online platforms for content posted on their services:

It’s hard to imagine sites like Yelp, Reddit, or Facebook existing in their current form without a law like Section 230. Yelp, for example, is regularly threatened by business owners for allegedly defamatory reviews. Section 230 allows Yelp to basically ignore these threats. Without Section 230, Yelp would need a large staff to conduct legal analysis of potentially defamatory reviews–a cost that could have prevented Yelp from getting off the ground 15 years ago.

Section 230 was, of course, in the news recently because of the president’s attempt to issue an executive order undoing it. But Democratic candidate Joe Biden has also called to revoke the immunity implication of Section 230, at least in the case of Facebook.

Perhaps most importantly, though many politicians say that Section 230 requires online platforms to be “politically neutral” that’s actually not the case at all:

And despite a number of politicians’ claims, Kosseff added, “there’s no mention I can find of a requirement for neutrality.” The authors of the statute “do talk about a need to promote political discourse,” he adds. “But I don’t see anything saying to receive 230 protections you must be neutral.”

Fundamentally, the law is not well understood and the implications of rolling it back are potentially damaging (even as there are definite needs to tweak and reform parts of it as well). Lee’s rundown should be required reading for anybody looking to understand Section 230, and especially for all those politicians who want to revise it.

by Jason Snell

June 10, 2020 10:45 AM PT

Apple will discontinue iTunes U next year

Apple announced today that it’s discontinuing iTunes U at the end of 2021. Apple has been moving away from the iTunes U concept for some time, moving iTunes U content to Apple Podcasts back in 2017, and now deprecating the education-focused app in favor of its Classroom and Schoolwork apps, and more:

Classroom turns your iPad into a powerful teaching assistant, helping teachers guide students through a lesson, see their progress, and keep them on track. Schoolwork helps teachers save time and maximize each student’s potential by making it easy for teachers to share class materials, get students to a specific activity in an app, collaborate with students, and view student progress.

In addition to Classroom and Schoolwork, Apple also introduced Apple School Manager to enable IT Administrators to easily manage iPads, Macs, Apple TV, Apple IDs, books, and apps, while ensuring data is kept secure and private. Apps such as Pages, Numbers, Keynote, GarageBand, iMovie, Clips, and Swift Playgrounds have education-specific features that are used regularly by teachers and students.

In other words, Apple has other education options available, and educational experiences that rely on iTunes U will last through the next academic year. Apple recommends that publishers of public content migrate to podcasts and ebooks—Apple Podcasts and Apple Books, of course—if they want to continue to communicate their educational material to the wider world.

by Dan Moren

June 9, 2020 8:47 AM PT

IBM no longer developing facial recognition

IBM CEO Arvind Krishna in a letter to Congress:

IBM no longer offers general purpose IBM facial recognition or analysis software. IBM firmly opposes and will not condone uses of any technology, including facial recognition technology offered by other vendors, for mass surveillance, racial profiling, violations of basic human rights and freedoms, or any purpose which is not consistent with our values and Principles of Trust and Transparency. We believe now is the time to begin a national dialogue on whether and how facial recognition technology should be employed by domestic law enforcement agencies.
Artificial Intelligence is a powerful tool that can help law enforcement keep citizens safe. But vendors and users of Al systems have a shared responsibility to ensure that Al is tested for bias, particularity when used in law enforcement, and that such bias testing is audited and reported.
Finally, national policy also should encourage and advance uses of technology that bring greater transparency and accountability to policing, such as body cameras and modern data analytics techniques.

As Ars Technica’s Kate Cox points out, IBM is currently in the midst of a reorganization, so it may be that facial recognition was getting the axe anyway, but the rationale presented by Krishna is still sound. Facial recognition is problematic, especially for people of color, and it’s already being widely deployed around the world, often without consideration of its limitations, downsides, and inherent biases.

Krishna also advocates for police reform and providing more pathways for people of color to acquire the skills needed for jobs in the tech industry.

The letter also stands in stark contrast to another tech giant, Amazon, which has not only been providing facial recognition systems to law enforcement, but has at least considered the possibility of implementing such technology in its consumer-oriented Ring doorbell and security cameras–which could then potentially be accessed by police.

by Dan Moren

June 9, 2020 6:17 AM PT

Bloomberg: Apple to announce Mac ARM transition at WWDC

Mark Gurman at Bloomberg says that the ARM transition is imminent:

Apple Inc. is preparing to announce a shift to its own main processors in Mac computers, replacing chips from Intel Corp., as early as this month at its annual developer conference, according to people familiar with the plans.

The company is holding WWDC the week of June 22. Unveiling the initiative, codenamed Kalamata, at the event would give outside developers time to adjust before new Macs roll out in 2021, the people said. Since the hardware transition is still months away, the timing of the announcement could change, they added, while asking not to be identified discussing private plans.

We have, of course, been expecting this move for some time now, but it certainly seems as though the evidence is mounting for an announcement at WWDC.

Gurman’s report contains a few interesting tidbits, such as the fact that the hardware transition is still months off, suggesting that developers will be given a healthy heads up to adapt their software before new products start to arrive.

It also lends credence to the idea of the iPad Pro as a stealth ARM Mac development kit, since those developers will presumably need to test their software on something.¹

Gurman also says that Apple’s internal tests show significant performance gains in graphics performance and AI-based apps, and suggests that power efficiency should be better as well. That raises an interesting question, to my mind: is there any place where Apple’s chips don’t measure up to Intel’s? Price? Non-graphics compute performance? Or is it all upside?

This is likely to be the biggest shift in the Mac since the Intel transition, although given Apple’s penchant for keeping underlying technical shifts seamless, it may go largely unnoticed by many users. With just under two weeks until WWDC, looks like we’ll find out sooner rather than later.

by Jason Snell

June 4, 2020 10:32 AM PT

Tim Cook: ‘Speaking up on racism’

Apple CEO Tim Cook, posted at the top of Apple’s homepage:

But we must do more. We commit to continuing our work to bring critical resources and technology to underserved school systems. We commit to continuing to fight the forces of environmental injustice — like climate change — which disproportionately harm Black communities and other communities of color. We commit to looking inward and pushing progress forward on inclusion and diversity, so that every great idea can be heard. And we’re donating to organizations including the Equal Justice Initiative, which challenge racial injustice and mass incarceration.

To create change, we have to reexamine our own views and actions in light of a pain that is deeply felt but too often ignored. Issues of human dignity will not abide standing on the sidelines. To the Black community — we see you. You matter and your lives matter.

I believe that Tim Cook truly cares about diversity. He’s also right that Apple (like so many of us, individually and as companies and organizations and industries) must do more.

by Jason Snell

June 3, 2020 11:36 AM PT

The science and reality of mask wearing

The Chief of Medicine at UC San Francisco, Bob Wachter, has been a must-follow during the COVID-19 outbreak. Last month he posted a tweetstorm, upgraded to a Medium post, with some clear and sensible explanations of how masks work at preventing the spread of the virus, and where they’re most effective.

Of course the main point is that you wear a mask to protect others in case you’re infected and asymptomatic, not that you wear a mask as personal protection. Wearing a mask shows you are concerned about the welfare of others. It’s not a sign of fear, it’s a sign of compassion.

His anecdote about someone with COVID-19 riding on a packed airplane, coughing repeatedly, but wearing a mask—and not infecting anyone around them—really hits it home.

And there’s this sort of practical advice, too:

One of the most common questions is whether it is necessary to wear a mask when walking or exercising outside. Empiric and simulation studies have shown that there is practically zero risk of viral spread when one is outdoors and keeping a distance of greater than six feet from others. I personally don’t wear a mask when walking the dog (but I do keep one with me just in case I encounter someone at close range). But I always wear a mask inside, or if an encounter within six feet is likely.

This pretty much tracks with how I approach this, and it’s what my county’s health department has mandated: Wear a mask indoors or if you’re going to be close to people, but don’t sweat it if you’re out walking the dog and there’s nobody around. But carry a mask in case you run into anyone.